Rogers V. Whitaker and informed consent in Australia: A fair dinkum duty of disclosure

Medical Law Review

Volumn 1, Issue 2, 1993, Pages 139-159

  Chalmers, Don ^a   Schwartz, Robert ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TASMANIA   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO   (Mexico)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUSTRALIA; CANTERBURY V. SPENCE; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; INJURY; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; JURISPRUDENCE; LEGAL APPROACH; LEGAL LIABILITY; MALPRACTICE; PATIENT CARE; PHYSICIAN; PROFESSIONAL PATIENT RELATIONSHIP; RISK; RISK ASSESSMENT; ROGERS V. WHITAKER; SIDAWAY V. BETHLEM ROYAL HOSPITAL; STANDARD; SURGERY; UNITED KINGDOM; UNITED STATES;

CANTERBURY V. SPENCE; LEGAL APPROACH; PROFESSIONAL PATIENT RELATIONSHIP; ROGERS V. WHITAKER; SIDAWAY V. BETHLEM ROYAL HOSPITAL;

AUSTRALIA; DISCLOSURE; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; JURISPRUDENCE; LIABILITY, LEGAL; MALPRACTICE; PATIENT CARE; PHYSICIANS; REFERENCE STANDARDS; RISK; RISK ASSESSMENT; SURGERY; UNITED STATES; WOUNDS AND INJURIES;

EID: 0027621515     PISSN: 09670742     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/medlaw/1.2.139     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Rogers V.Whitaker (1992) 67 A.L.J.R. 47 (High Court of Australia).
2. Canterbury V.Spence 464 F. 2d 772 (1972) (D.C. Cir.).
3. Sidaway V.Governors of Bethlem Royal Hospital [1985] A.C. 871 (H.L.).
4. Rogers V.Whitaker (1991) 23 N.S.W.L.R. 600 at 610 F per Handley J.A.
5. Whitaker V. Rogers (1990) Aust. Torts Reports 81-062.
6. BlythV.BloomsburyH.A. (1987) Times, February 11, is discussed.
7. I. Kennedy and A. Grubb, Medical Law: Text and Materials(Butterworths 1989) at 216-29.
8. D. Louisell and H. Williams, Medical Malpractice (1987) at s. 22.04.
9. S. McLean, A Patient's Right to Know(Dartmouth 1989) chs. 5-7.
10. M. Powers and N. Harris, Medical Negligence (Butter-worths 1990) ch. 10.
11. P. D. G. Skegg, Law Ethics and Medicine (Oxford, Clarendon Press 1984) ch. 4.
12. E. Picard, “Consent to Medical Treatment in Canada” (1981) 19 Osgoode Hall Law Journal140.
13. B. Bromberger, “Patient Participation in Decision Making: Are the Courts the Answer?” (1983) 6 University of New South Wales Law Journal1.
14. I. Kennedy and A. Grubb, supra, at 223-5.
15. M. Somerville, “Structuring the Issues in Informed Consent” (1981) 26 McGill Law Journal 740.
16. I. Kennedy and A. Grubb, supra and Justice Laskin’s oft-cited opinion for the Supreme Court of Canada in Reibl v. Hughes (1980) 114 D.L.R. 3d 1.
17. B. Furrowet al., Health Law, (2nd edn. 1991) at 327 n. 7.
18. J. Fleming, Law of Torts, (7th edn. Law Book Co.1987) chs. 7-8.
19. B. Furrowet al., Health Law, (2nd edn.) supra, at 336-7 n. 1.
20. BolamV.Friem Hospital Management Committee[1957] 1 W.L.R. 582.
21. Anthony Mason C.J., “An Australian Law for Australia?”, Address to the Law Council of Australia Convention, Adelaide, September 1991 26 Law Notes No. 10 at 14.
22. Whitaker v. Rogers(1990)Aust. Torts Reports 81-062 at 68, 316-17.
23. Jaensch V.Coffey (1984) 155 C.L.R. 549, Sutherland Shire Council v. Heyman (1985) 157 C.L.R. 424.
24. D. Giesen, International Medical Malpractice Law (Martinus Nijhoff London 1988).
25. F. Rozovsky, Consent to Treatment s. 1.13.4 (1984).
26. Fain V.Smith (1985) 479 So. 2d 1150 (Ala.).
27. Fain V.Smith (1991) 23 N.S.W.L.R. 600-611.
28. Whitaker V. Rogers,(1990) Aust. Torts Reports 81-462 at 68,308.
29. A. Grubb and R. Schwartz, “Why Britain Can’t Afford Informed Consent” (1986) 16Hastings Center Report 22.
30. F. Miller, “Informed Consent for the Man on the Clapham Omnibus: An English Cure for the ‘American Disease’?” (1987) 9 Western New England Law Review 169.
31. A. Grubb and R. Schwartz, “Why Britain Can’t Afford Informed Consent”, supran. 67.
32. A. Grubb and R. Schwartz, supra n. 67.
33. Goode V.Nash (1979) 21 S.A.S.R. 419-422.
34. Albrighton V.Royal Prince Alfred Hospital [1980] 2 N.S.W.LR. 542 at 562-3.
35. Rogers V.Whitaker (1991) 23 N.S.W.L.R. 600, 608, 618, 619.
36. National Health and Medical Research Council Working Party, General Guidelines for Medical Practitioners on Providing Information to Patients:Preliminary Discussion Paper, Australian Government Pub. Service 1991.